The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The punishment of the accused shall be eight months by imprisonment.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the gist of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

In this court, the prosecutor applied the applicable law to the name of the crime as "special injury, assault," and the applicable law to "Article 258-2 (1), Article 257 (1), and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act," and applied for the permission to amend the indictment as follows, and the court approved the modification of the indictment and changed the subject of the judgment by this court.

1. On January 2, 2017, the Defendant, who suffered special injury, in the “E Industry Company” operated by the victim D in Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, Seoul on January 2, 2017, on the ground that the Defendant’s repair of the F Poter truck that the Defendant requested repair was not properly maintained, whether the Defendant “the Defendant has treated the F Poring-in truck.”

"In the loading of the cargo, the hack pipe (47 cm in length, 29 cm in length) which is dangerous in the loading of the cargo is cut, and the victim's left shoulder was sealed, thereby damaging the hacker's hack that cannot be seen as treatment days.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and inflicted an injury on the victim.

2. The Defendant, at the same time and at the same place as above, committed assault to the victim in a hack pipe, as in the above paragraph (1) of this Article, carried the victim’s left shoulder, put the hack pipe in a re-loading, flapsing the hacker, leading the victim into the hacker, leading the victim to resist, intending to return to the Defendant’s hacker freight lane, return to the Defendant’s hacker, and, in order to prevent the victim from departing from the Defendant’s port and departing from the Defendant’s hacker, committed assault to the victim at one time by making the victim’s face hack.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio due to changes in indictment.

The judgment of the court below is ex officio in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing.